GIND vs. AAAU
GIND (Goldman Sachs India Equity ETF) and AAAU (Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GIND is a India Equities fund actively managed by Goldman Sachs, while AAAU is a Gold fund tracking the LBMA Gold PM Price. GIND is actively managed, while AAAU is passively managed. Over the past year, GIND returned -11.49% vs 21.57% for AAAU. At a 0.22 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. GIND charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.18%/yr for AAAU.
Performance
GIND vs. AAAU - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GIND achieves a -8.22% return, which is significantly lower than AAAU's -6.02% return.
GIND
- 1D
- -0.03%
- 1M
- 0.54%
- 6M
- -6.25%
- YTD
- -8.22%
- 1Y
- -11.49%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
AAAU
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- -6.15%
- 6M
- -12.53%
- YTD
- -6.02%
- 1Y
- 21.57%
- 3Y*
- 27.33%
- 5Y*
- 17.30%
- 10Y*
- —
GIND vs. AAAU - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
GIND Goldman Sachs India Equity ETF | -8.22% | 4.70% |
AAAU Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF | -6.02% | 37.81% |
Correlation
The correlation between GIND and AAAU is 0.26, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.26 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 3, 2025 | 0.22 |
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
GIND vs. AAAU — Risk / Return Rank
GIND
AAAU
GIND vs. AAAU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs India Equity ETF (GIND) and Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF (AAAU). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| GIND | AAAU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.47 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.06 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.90 | 1.16 | -0.27 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.52 | 0.83 | -1.35 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.16 | 1.99 | -3.15 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
GIND vs. AAAU - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GIND drawdown since its inception was -22.97%, smaller than the maximum AAAU drawdown of -26.14%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GIND and AAAU.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GIND | AAAU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -22.97% | -26.14% | +3.17% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -22.27% | -26.14% | +3.87% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -26.14% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -26.14% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -12.98% | -24.84% | +11.86% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.42% | -6.42% | -1.00% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 9.88% | 10.86% | -0.98% |
Volatility
GIND vs. AAAU - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Goldman Sachs India Equity ETF (GIND) is 4.88%, while Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF (AAAU) has a volatility of 6.96%. This indicates that GIND experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than AAAU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GIND | AAAU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.88% | 6.96% | -2.08% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.62% | 23.90% | -9.28% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.72% | 27.65% | -10.93% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.09% | 18.23% | -1.14% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.09% | 17.21% | -0.12% |
GIND vs. AAAU - Expense Ratio Comparison
GIND has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than AAAU's 0.18% expense ratio.
Dividends
GIND vs. AAAU - Dividend Comparison
Neither GIND nor AAAU has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
GIND and AAAU have a correlation of 0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
AAAU has higher volatility (6.96%) compared to GIND (4.88%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GIND dropped -22.97% vs AAAU's -26.14%.
On 1-year performance, AAAU leads with 21.57% vs -11.49% for GIND. On fees, AAAU is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, GIND has been the lower-risk option at 4.88%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, AAAU has performed better with a 21.57% return vs -11.49%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
AAAU is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for GIND.
GIND and AAAU have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
GIND is categorized as India Equities, while AAAU is Gold. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for GIND and 0.18% for AAAU.
AAAU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.78 vs -0.69), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.
Find the right allocation for GIND and AAAU
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer